Federal Control of Oregon National Guard Sparks Controversy

Thu Oct 16 2025 03:45:47 GMT+0300 (Eastern European Summer Time)

The deployment of 200 Oregon National Guard members under federal control to support immigration enforcement has raised objections from state leaders and sparked legal challenges.

In a recent Defense Department memo, the Trump administration announced the deployment of 200 members of the Oregon National Guard to protect immigration enforcement offices, igniting protests and objections from state officials. Governor Tina Kotek and Attorney General Dan Rayfield criticized the move as an overreach of power and a political maneuver rather than a genuine effort for public safety. This action follows a similar deployment in Los Angeles and reflects ongoing tensions surrounding immigration policies under the Trump administration.

In a controversial move, the Oregon National Guard is seeing a deployment of 200 members under federal command as part of President Trump's efforts to reinforce immigration enforcement in the state. As outlined in a memo from the Defense Department, this deployment aims to protect federal officers and facilities amid ongoing tensions surrounding immigration policy.

The decision has been met with strong opposition from Oregon's state leaders, particularly Governor Tina Kotek, who expressed her discontent during a conversation with President Trump. Kotek emphasized that Oregon is our home — not a military target, reinforcing the sentiment against using military forces in domestic matters.

Attorney General Dan Rayfield announced plans to file a federal lawsuit to challenge the deployment, claiming it is an overreach of executive power intended to exert political influence rather than enhance public safety. He harshly criticized Trump’s actions as a means to chase media coverage at the expense of the community.

Previous instances, such as the deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles, have drawn parallels to this situation, suggesting an emerging pattern of federal intervention in state matters concerning immigration. Trump’s remarks have further escalated the situation, targeting Portland specifically and describing his directive to the Pentagon as a response to perceived threats against federal facilities from domestic groups.

This deployment represents a stark contrast to previous military actions, such as the significant presence of National Guard troops in Washington, D.C. While only a fraction of those troops are being sent to Oregon, the implications of federal control over state military resources signal a potential new chapter in the ongoing immigration debate and state-federal relations.